theglobeandmail.com
Canadian ETFs Poised to Outperform: A Morningstar Rating Analysis
This analysis identifies Canadian-listed ETFs with average historical returns (three-star Morningstar rating) but high potential for future outperformance (gold, silver, or bronze Morningstar Medalist rating), considering over 1,700 ETFs and focusing on those actively covered by Morningstar analysts.
- How do Morningstar's Star and Medalist Ratings differ in their assessment of ETF performance, and why is this dual approach valuable for investment decisions?
- Morningstar's Star Rating is a backward-looking, risk-adjusted performance measure, while the Medalist Rating is a forward-looking assessment based on people, process, and parent factors. The selection criteria combine average historical returns with high potential for future outperformance, factoring in fees.
- What Canadian-listed ETFs demonstrate average historical performance (three-star Morningstar rating) but exhibit strong potential for future outperformance (gold, silver, or bronze Morningstar Medalist rating)?
- This article identifies Canadian-listed ETFs with a three-star Morningstar Star Rating (average historical performance) but a gold, silver, or bronze Morningstar Medalist Rating (indicating potential for future outperformance). The analysis considers over 1,700 ETFs, focusing on those actively covered by Morningstar analysts.
- What specific characteristics of the 'people', 'process', and 'parent' pillars in Morningstar's Medalist Rating framework contribute to an ETF's potential for outperformance, and how might these factors change over time?
- The resulting ETFs, listed in the accompanying table, offer investors a blend of proven stability and future potential. Investors should consider the asset class and category of each ETF before making investment decisions, as Morningstar's ratings are relative to category peers. This is not financial advice; independent research is recommended.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article's framing emphasizes the potential for future outperformance, highlighting the Morningstar Medalist Rating more prominently than the historical performance (Star Rating). This creates a positive bias, potentially leading readers to overestimate the certainty of future returns. The headline and introduction focus on the potential for outperformance, which may overshadow the fact that these ETFs have only delivered average historical returns.
Language Bias
The language used is generally neutral and objective, employing financial terminology appropriately. However, phrases like "well positioned to outperform" and "ingredients to outperform peers" carry a slightly optimistic tone, suggesting a higher degree of certainty about future performance than is warranted. More cautious language could be used to reflect the inherent uncertainty in investment predictions.
Bias by Omission
The article does not explicitly state what data was excluded from the analysis, such as ETFs not covered by Morningstar or those with insufficient data. This omission could limit the scope of the findings and prevent a completely comprehensive overview of Canadian-listed ETFs.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a clear dichotomy between average historical performance (three-star rating) and the potential for future outperformance (gold, silver, or bronze Medalist Rating). While this framework is useful, it doesn't account for funds that might have strong historical performance but lack the potential for future outperformance or vice versa. This oversimplification could mislead readers into believing these are the only two relevant categories.